I did, should you (2)
Things are starting to get hot and heavy now. We will be seeing some mathematical definitions soon. To recap, so far we’ve decided which kinds of spatial objects (points, lines, regions) as well as what primitive non logical symbols to allow in our theory. We’ve settled on regions and (binary) relations.
The question is now, out of the possible set of relations out which one should you choose? Different sets have different advantages and disadvantages. Understanding these will help in choosing a proper theory for your problem. I might even find that my present course of action is not the best, maybe RCC-8 will not allow me to represent my problem properly.
Varzi showed that mereology is not sufficient by itself, but that integrating mereology and topology will. Hence we arrive at mereotopology. Given that topology already deals with spatial entities and as such is a necessary component, how should we work in these topology theories? Three general strategies are available:
- Generalize mereology by adding topological primitives.
- Topology is the primary theory and mereology is secondary.
- Mereology is primary theory and topology is secondary.
To paraphrase: “An important familiy of theories steam from the intuition that parthood and connection cannot be defined in terms of each other.”
For now, I’m going to take a detour and explore mereotopology in more detail to ensure that I fully understand these implications. Please subscribe to my feed to hear about my next adventure.
QSR, Research, bioinformatics | julia | 
March 11, 2009 10:37
Subscribe